STATEMENT OF
JACK A. BLACKWELL
REGIONAL FORESTER, INTERMOUNTAIN REGION
USDA FOREST SERVICE
Before the Subcommittee on Forests and Forest Health
U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Resources
Concerning
MANAGEMENT OF SOUTH JARBIDGE CANYON
ON THE
HUMBOLDT-TOIYABE NATIONAL FOREST
Saturday, November 13, 1999
Elko, Nevada
MADAM CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE:
Thank you for the opportunity to be with you today to discuss management
of the South Jarbidge Canyon in the Jarbidge Ranger District of the
Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest. Today I am accompanied by Ben
Siminoe, Assistant Forest Supervisor of the Humboldt-Toiyabe National
Forest.
The Forest Service faces the dilemma of providing public access in South
Jarbidge Canyon, while maintaining fisheries habitat and proper functioning
condition of the watershed. The alternative of rebuilding the Forest Road
#64, known as the South Canyon road, has been analyzed extensively, and
the Forest Service does not believe this is a feasible option.
In my testimony, I will summarize the analysis of South Jarbidge Canyon
and the events that have affected the management of this canyon and its
aquatic resources.
South Jarbidge Canyon is a narrow canyon with steep slopes prone to
periodic debris flows. Forest Road #64 is located adjacent to the west fork
of the Jarbidge River in the bottom of the canyon. The road is owned by the
United States, and managed by the Forest Service. The road was built
around 1910 or 1911 by miners accessing their claims. Over the years, local
residents, Elko County, and the Forest Service have maintained the road.
Records since the 1950's indicate that floods have washed out portions of
this road about once every 10 years. Prior to 1995, Forest Road #64 was
roughly two miles long and terminated at a parking area that includes an
outhouse and a horse loading ramp. Along the road, about one-half mile
from the parking area, is another outhouse and four primitive campsites. In
1995, a flood washed out portions of the upper 1.5 miles of Forest Road #64.
In 1997, the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest prepared an environmental
assessment (EA) and the District Ranger issued a decision to rebuild Forest
Road #64. The Regional Forester reviewed the 1997 decision as part of an
administrative appeal and remanded it to the Humboldt-Toiyabe National
Forest for further analysis on the effects to bull trout and other aquatic
species from road construction and from possible future road failure. The
west fork of the Jarbidge River is home to a unique population of bull trout
due to its isolation and its location on the southern boundary of bull trout
habitat.
On June 13, 1998, the Fish and Wildlife Service proposed listing the
Jarbidge River bull trout under the Endangered Species Act. In April, 1999,
the bull trout were formally listed as a threatened species. The listing
requires the Forest Service to consult with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
2
Service on agency actions, such as construction or reconstruction, to ensure
the trout’s survival is not jeopardized.
In late June, 1998, the Humboldt-Toiyabe National Forest released the
second EA for public comment. Although this EA included alternatives for
rebuilding the road, the preferred alternative was a 1.5 mile lofted trail to
access Snowslide Trailhead. In the EA, the Humboldt-Toiyabe National
Forest proposed to provide access to the area in a way that would allow for
management of the watershed and associated fisheries while addressing the
economic needs of the town of Jarbidge. The Forest Service has not made a
final decision regarding reconstruction of the road and when it does, it will
be subject to administrative appeal and judicial review.
Elko County did not submit comments during the 30 day comment period
for the EA. However, the County did make public statements claiming that
Forest Road #64 was needed for emergency fire protection, to help provide
camping and picnicking opportunities, and to provide access to the elderly
and handicapped. The Forest Service suggested that campsites could be
developed in other locations to meet this need. A trail alternative that
would allow access for all-terrain vehicles has been added to the analysis
and is being considered in the ongoing National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) process. Only recently has Elko County claimed ownership of
Forest Road #64 under RS2477.
While the Forest Service continued to evaluate the environmental effects of
the various alternatives for Forest Road #64, Elko County Commission
directed its county road department to reconstruct Forest Road #64. This
3
reconstruction work began on July 21 but was halted on July 22, 1998, when
Nevada Department of Environmental Protection and U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers issued cease and desist orders.
The section of South Jarbidge Canyon altered by the County's construction
activities was extremely unstable and at risk for failure. To prevent further
damage to the aquatic habitat of the Jarbidge River, stabilization work on the
river channel and surrounding floodplain was necessary before the onset of
winter. In November and December 1998, Forest Service and contracted
crews rehabilitated the damaged area. To stabilize the site before the spring
because had the site been left in a unstable condition, there could have been
severe damage during spring snowmelt and runoff. The rehabilitation cost
was about $400,000.
Senator Harry Reid formed a working group consisting of representatives
from Elko County, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the Forest Service,
Trout Unlimited, Nevada Department of Wildlife, Congressman
Gibbons’office, and several fisheries experts to discuss whether Forest Road
#64 could be rebuilt without harm to the aquatic habitat. In April of 1999,
the group consensus was that, if rebuilt, Forest Road #64 would adversely
impact the aquatic habitat and the bull trout.
On August 27, 1999, the U.S. Attorney's Office, District of Nevada, notified
Elko County that it intended to file suit against the County to recover the
cost of the 1998 stabilization work and to address violations of the Clean
Water Act unless some resolution of this dispute could be negotiated.
Negotiations are ongoing.
4
Two months ago, three individuals announced that they were organizing a
work party to re-open Forest Road #64. If this event had gone forward as
planned, damage could have occurred to the bull trout and its habitat. On
October 7, 1999, the United States filed suit against the three individuals and
the work party. In connection with the lawsuit, a U.S. district court judge
issued a temporary restraining order enjoining the ``work party'' due to likely
violations of the Endangered Species Act that would occur.
Subsequently, on October 21, 1999, the same district judge joined Elko
County in the lawsuit against the “work party” and directed all parties to
participate in settlement negotiations to be mediated by the U.S. Institute for
Environmental Conflict Resolution. We hope that a settlement at this time
can be reached to resolve the matter once and for all.
SUMMARY:
In conclusion, the Forest Service and the other involved state and federal
agencies look forward to bringing this issue to closure. The NEPA analysis
of Forest Road #64 is ongoing and the District Ranger will issue another
decision for public review and comment in the near future. We sincerely
hope that Elko County will actively participate in this established planning
process.
Madam Chairman, this concludes my statement. I will be happy to answer
questions you may have.
5